Analysis tool for Riak, like Cube or Graphite - analysis

Is there any analysis tool like Graphite or Cube based on Riak?
I'm basically looking for an aggregation framework I can use with Riak to do real-time analytics and data aggregations.

pretty old question but Druid may be a good fit.
This is how:
Druid supports S3 as a "deep store" on which aggregates, inverted indices and all other stuff to do realtime olap queries are based
The Riak CS storage API is S3-compatible.

Related

Difference Between Cloud Data fusion and DataFlow on GCP

What is the difference between GCP pipeline services:
Cloud Dataflow and Cloud Data fusion ...
which to you when?
I did a high level pricing taking 10 instances with Basic in Data fusion.
and 10 instance cluster (n1-standard-8) in Dataflow.
The pricing is more than double for Datafusion.
What are the pros and cons for each over one another
Cloud Dataflow is purpose built for highly parallelized graph processing. And can be used for batch processing and stream based processing. It is also built to be fully managed, obfuscating the need to manage and understand underlying resource scaling concepts e.g how to optimize shuffle performance or deal with key imbalance issues. The user/developer is responsible for building the graph via code; creating N transforms and or operations to achieve desired goal. For example: read files from storage, process each line in file, extract data from line, cast data to numeric, sum data in groups of X, write output to data lake.
Cloud Data Fusion is focused on enabling data integration scenarios => reading from source (via extensible set of connectors) and writing to targets e.g. BigQuery, storage, etc. It does have parallelization concepts, but they are not fully managed like Cloud Dataflow. CDF rides on top of Cloud Dataproc which is a managed version for Hadoop based processing. It's sweet spot is visual based graph development leveraging an extensible set of connectors and operators.
Your question is based on "cost" concepts. My advice is to take a step back and define what your processing/graph goal(s) look like. Then look at each products value. If you want full control over processing semantics with greater focus on analytics and want to run in batch and or must have streaming focus on Dataflow. If you want point and click data movement, with less focus need on data analytics AND do not need streaming then look at CDF.

Migrate from running ML training and testing locally to Google Cloud

I currently have a simple Machine Learning infrastructure running locally and I want to migrate this all onto Google Cloud. I simply fetch the data I need from a database, build my model and then test the model on test data. This is all done in PyCharm locally.
I want to simply migrate this and have the possibility for all this to be done on Google Cloud, while having the flexibility to make local changes that can apply when run on the cloud as well. There are many Google Cloud resources relating to this and so I am looking for best practices people follow on running such a procedure.
Thanks and please let me know if there are any clarifications needed.
I highly suggest you to take a look at this machine learning workflow in the cloud which consists of:
Data Ingestion and Collection
Storing the data.
Processing data.
ML training.
ML deployment.
Data Ingestion and Collection
There are multiple resources you can use if you would like to ingest data with Google Cloud Platform. The simplest solution I can recommend to you are both Google Compute Engine or an App Engine App (for example for a forum where a user fill some data up).
Nonetheless, if you would like to ingest data in real-time, you can also use Cloud Pub/Sub.
Storing the data
As you mentioned, you are retrieving all the information from a database. If you are used to work with SQL or NoSQL I highy suggest you to go after Cloud SQL. Not only provides a good interface when building your instance, but also lets you access it securely and very rapidly.
If it not the case, you can also use Google Cloud Storage or BigQuery, but over those two, I will pick BigQuery since it has also the possibility to work with stream data.
Processing data
For processing data before feeding it to the model you can use either:
Cloud DataFlow: Cloud Dataflow is a fully-managed service for transforming and enriching data in stream (real time) and batch (historical) modes with equal reliability and expressiveness -- no more complex workarounds or compromises needed.
Cloud Dataproc: Dataproc is a fast, easy-to-use, fully managed cloud service for running Apache Spark and Apache Hadoop clusters in a simpler, more cost-efficient way.
Cloud Dataprep: Cloud Dataprep by Trifacta is an intelligent data service for visually exploring, cleaning, and preparing structured and unstructured data for analysis, reporting, and machine learning.
ML training & ML deployment
For training/deploying your ML model I would suggest to use AI platform.
AI Platform makes it easy for machine learning developers, data scientists, and data engineers to take their ML projects from ideation to production and deployment, quickly and cost-effectively.
If you have to work with huge datasets, the best practices are run the model as a Tensorflow job with AI Platform so you can have a training cluster.
Finally for deploying your models using AI Platform, you can take a look here.

Using Google ML Engine with BigQuery?

I'm currently designing a data warehouse in BigQuery. I'm planning to store user data like past purchases or abandoned carts.
This seems to be perfect to manually analyze trends and to get insights. But what if I want to leverage Machine Learning, e.g. to suggest products to a group of users?
I have looked into Google ML Engine and TensorFlow, and it seems like the TensorFlow model would need to query BigQuery first. In some scenarios, this could mean that TensorFlow would need to query all or most of the data that is stored in BigQuery.
This feels a bit off, so I'm wondering if this is really how things are supposed to happen. Otherwise, I assume that my ML model would have to work with stale data?
So I would agree with you, using BigQuery as a data warehouse for your ML is expensive. It would be cheaper and much more efficient to use Google Cloud Storage to store all the data you wish to process. Once everything is processed and generated, you may then wish to push that data to BigQuery push that data to another source like Spanner or even Cloud Storage.
That being said Google has now created a beta product BigQuery ML. This now allows users to create and execute machine learning models in BigQuery via the use of SQL queries. I believe it uses python and tensorflow under the hood, but I believe it would be the best solution given that you have a light weight ML load.
Since it is still in beta as of now, I don't know well it's performance compares to Google ML engine and tensorflow.
Depending on what kind of model you want to train and how you want to server the model you can do one the following options:
You can export your data to Google Cloud Storage as CSV and then read the files in Cloud ML Engine. This will let you use the power of Tensorflow and you can then use Cloud ML Engine's serving system to send traffic to your model.
On the downside, this means that you have to export all of your BigQuery data to GCS and every time you decide to make any change to the data you need to go back to BigQuery and export again. Also if the data you want to prediction on is in BigQuery you have to export that as well and send it to Cloud ML Engine using a separate system.
If you want to explore and interactively train Logistic or Linear regression models on your data, you can use BigQuery Machine learning. This will allow you to slice and dice your data in BigQuery and experiment with different parts of your data and various preprocessing options. You can also use all the power of SQL. BigQuery ML also allows you to use the model after training within BigQuery (you can use SQL to feed data in to the model).
For many cases using full power of Tensorflow (i.e. using DNNs) is not necessary. This is especially true for structured data. On the other hand, most of your time will be spent on preprocessing and cleaning the data which would be much easier in SQL in BigQuery.
So you have two options here. Choose based on your needs.
P.S.: You can also try using BigQuery Reader in Tensorflow. I don't recommend it as it is very slow. But if your data is not huge it may work for you.

Neo4j or GraphX / Giraph what to choose?

Just started my excursion to graph processing methods and tools. What we basically do - count some standard metrics like pagerank, clustering coefficient, triangle count, diameter, connectivity etc. In the past was happy with Octave, but when we started to work with graphs having let's say 10^9 nodes/edges we stuck.
So the possible solutions can be distributed cloud made with Hadoop/Giraph, Spark/GraphX, Neo4j on top of them, etc.
But since I am a beginner, can someone advise what actually to choose? I did not get the difference when to use Spark/GraphX and when Neo4j? Right now I consider Spark/GraphX, since it have more Python alike syntax, while neo4j has the own Cypher. Visualization in neo4j is cool but not useful in such a large scale. I do not understand is there a reason to use additional level of software (neo4j) or just use Spark/GraphX? Since I understood neo4j will not save so much time like if we worked with pure hadoop vs Giraph or GraphX or Hive.
Thank you.
Neo4J: It is a graphical database which helps out identifying the relationships and entities data usually from the disk. It's popularity and choice is given in this link. But when it needs to process the very large data-sets and real time processing to produce the graphical results/representation it needs to scale horizontally. In this case combination of Neo4J with Apache Spark will give significant performance benefits in such a way Spark will serve as an external graph compute solution.
Mazerunner is a distributed graph processing platform which extends Neo4J. It uses message broker to process distribute graph processing jobs to Apache Spark GraphX module.
GraphX: GraphX is a new component in Spark for graphs and graph-parallel computation. At a high level, GraphX extends the Spark RDD by introducing a new Graph abstraction: a directed multigraph with properties attached to each vertex and edge. It supports multiple Graph algorithms.
Conclusion:
It is always recommended to use the Hybrid combination of Neo4j with GraphX as they both easier to integrate.
For real time processing and processing large data-sets, use neo4j with GraphX.
For simple persistence and to show the entity relationship for a simple graphical display representation use standalone neo4j.
Neo4j: I have not used it, but I think it does all of a graph computation (like pagerank) on a single machine. Would that be able to handle your data set? It may depend on whether your entire graph fits into memory, and if not, how efficiently does it process data from disk. It may hit the same problems you encountered with Octave.
Spark GraphX: GraphX partitions graph data (vertices and edges) across a cluster of machines. This gives you horizontal scalability and parallelism in computation. Some things you may want to consider: it only has a Scala API right now (no Python yet). It does PageRank, triangle count, and connected components, but you may have to implement clustering coefficent and diameter yourself, using the provided graph API (pregel for example). The programming guide has a list of supported algorithms: https://spark.apache.org/docs/latest/graphx-programming-guide.html
GraphX is more of a realtime processing framework for the data that can be (and it's is better when) represented in a graph form. With GraphX you can use various algorithms that require large amounts of processing power (both RAM and CPU), and with neo4j you can (reliably) persist and update that data. This is what I'd suggest.
I know for sure that #kennybastani has done some pretty interesting advancements in that area, you can take a look at his mazerunner solution. It's also shipped as a docker image, so you can poke at it with a stick and find out for yourself whether you like it or not.
This image deploys a container with Apache Spark and uses GraphX to
perform ETL graph analysis on subgraphs exported from Neo4j. The
results of the analysis are applied back to the data in the Neo4j
database.

what is the advantage of RDF and Triple Storage to Neo4j?

Neo4j is a really fast and scalable graph database, it seems that it can be used on business projects and it is free, too!
At the same time, there are no RDF triple stores that work well with large data or deliver a high-speed access. And what is more, free RDF triple stores perform even worse.
So what is the advantage of RDF and RDF triple stores to Neo4j?
The advantage of using a triple store for RDF rather than Neo4j is that that's what they're designed for. Neo4j is pretty good for many use cases, but in my experience its performance for loading and querying RDF is well below all dedicated RDF databases.
It's a fallacy that RDF databases don't scale or are not fast. Sure, they're not yet up to the performance & scale levels that relational databases have, but they have a 50 year head start. Many triple stores scale into the billions of triples, provide 'standard' enterprise features, and provide great performance for many use cases.
If you're going to use RDF for a project, use a triple store; it's going to provide the best performance and set of features/APIs for working with RDF to build your application.
RDF and SPARQL are standards, so you have a choice of multiple implementations, and can migrate your data from one RDF store to another.
Additionally, version 1.1 of the SPARQL query language is quite sophisticated (more expressive than most SQL implementations) and can do all kinds of queries that would require a lot of code to be written in Neo4J.
If you are going for graph mining (e.g., graph traversal) upon triples, neo4j is a good choice. For the large triples, you might want to use its batchInserter which is fairly fast.
So I think it's all about your use case. Both technologies can and do overlap.
In my mind, there its mostly about the use case. Do you want a full knowledge graph including all the ecosystems from the semantic web? Then go for the triple store.
If you need a general-purpose graph (e.g. store big data as a graph) use the property graph model. My reasoning is, that the underlying philosophy is very much different and this starts with how the data is stored which has implications for your usage scenario.
let's do some out-of-mind bullet points here to compare. Take it with a grain of salt please as this is not a benchmark paper just some experience-based 5 min write down.
Property graph (neo4j):
Think of nodes/Edges as documents
Implemented on top of e.g. linked list, key-value stores (deep searches, large data e.g. via gremlin)
Support for OWL/RDF but not natively (as i see its on a meta layer)
Really great when it comes to having the data in the graph and doing ML (it stores it as linked lists that gives you nice vectors which is cool for ML out of the box)
Made for large data at scale.
Use Cases: (focus is on the data entities and not their classes)
Social Graphs and other scenarios where you need deep traversal
Large data graphs, where you have a lot of documents that need to be searched in a schema-free graph manner .
Analyzing customer funnels from click data etc. You want to move out of your relational schema because actually, you are in a graph use case...
Triple Store (E.g. rdf4j)
Think of data in maximum normal form as triples (no redundant data at all)
Triples are stored in context triples. Works a lot with index.
Broad but searches and specific knowledge extractions. Deep searches are sometimes cumbersome.
Scale is impressive and can scale to trillions of nodes with fast performance. But i would not recommend storing big data in the graph e.g. time-series or so. The reason is the special way how indexes are used and in order to scale horizontally, you may consider working with subgraphs ...
Support for all the ecosystems like SPARQL, SHACL, SWIRL etc. this is a big plus in case
Use cases:
It's really about knowledge graphs. Do you need shape testing, rule evaluation, inference, and reasoning? Go for it because you have to focus on the ontology and class structure!
Also e.g. you have IoT and want to configure relations for logistics and smart factory while the telemetry is stored somewhere else and only referenced in the graph.
I have heard rumors that it takes whole day to load 10M triples into Neo4j (it is actually the slowest one because it's not built primarily for RDF).
Sesame and 4Store are the fastest ones but Jena has powerful API.

Resources